The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Board of Appeals 2017-04-13 AGENDA ESTESPARKBOARDOFAPPEALS Thursday, April 13, 2017 4:00–6:00p.m.BoardRoom, TownHall 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park 1.OPEN MEETING Board of Appeals member introductions 2.CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of minutes from meeting on March 2, 2017 3.PURPOSE OF MEETING 4.UPDATES ON THE FOLLOWING: A. ISO evaluation of the Division of Building Safety B. Proposed amendments relating to vacation homes C. Handouts for vacation home life-safety surveys 5.REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST FOR PROJECTS BUILT UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE 6.PUBLIC COMMENT TheBoard of Appealswillacceptpubliccommentregardingany items listed on the agenda. 7.ADJOURN The Estes Park Board of Appeals reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals1 March 2, 2017 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Brad Klein, John Spooner, Joe Calvin, Don Darling, Tony Schiaffo Attending: Chair Darling, Members Spooner & Calvin Also Attending: Chief Building Official (CBO) Will Birchfield, Community Development Director Randy Hunt, Building Inspector Claude Traufield, Plans Examiner Charlie Phillips, Building Permit Technician Jacki Wiedow, Larimer County Building Official Eric Fried Absent: Members Klein & Schiaffo The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. Chair Darling called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Each Board member introduced himself and provided their area of expertise. CONSENT AGENDA Minutes from December 8, 2016 Board of Appeals meeting. It was moved and seconded (Calvin/Spooner) to approve the minutes as presented and the motion passed 3-0 with two absent. Minutes from February 9, 2017 Board of Appeals meeting. It was moved and seconded (Spooner/Calvin) to approve the minutes as presented and the motion passed 3-0 with two absent. PURPOSE OF MEETING Chair Darling explained the purpose of the meeting was to review information received at the February meeting and clarify descriptions of properties where vacation homes and small hotels are concerned. Chief Building Official Will Birchfield thanked John Spooner for chairing the Board of Appeals during the adoption process of the 2015 International Building Codes. He stated this was the first time a Board of Appeals, consisting of professionals in their respective fields, had been involved throughout the adoption process for the Town of Estes Park. CBO Birchfield stated if the proposed amendments to the International Residential Code (IRC) are approved and adopted, other amendments will be required in the International Building Code, International Existing Building Code, and the International Property Maintenance Code, to align with the amendments to the IRC. The proposed amendments apply to dwellings, vacation homes, and hotels. He presented and reviewed two flow charts that showed the implications of the code amendments. The first flow chart dealt with buildings that are existing prior to the approval and adoption of the proposed amendments. The information provided in the chart is based on the direction from the elected officials, and outlines the retroactive requirements for existing buildings. REVIEW OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS CBO Birchfield stated the proposed amendments have been drafted for existing Dwellings (house with residents living there more than 30 days), to not retroactively require (1) sprinkler systems, (2) handicap accessibility, or (3) life safety surveys. Using the new definition for Vacation Homes, the occupant load will be calculated as two people per bedroom plus two additional people, and life safety surveys will be required. CBO Birchfield stated Large Vacation Homes (nine or more occupants) will have a few additional requirements (refer to flow chart) in addition to the life safety survey. Large Vacation Homes will be treated the same across all Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) zone districts. If these homes do not comply with the criteria determined in the EVDC, those existing buidlings will be regulated by the IBC, occupant load will be one person for every 200 square feet, retroactive sprinklers and accessibility will be required, along with life safety surveys. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals2 March 2, 2017 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall CBO Birchfield stated the significance of the definition for Small Hotel is the property can be rented to several individual parties, whereas a Large Vacation Home must be rented to one associated group. If a building permit for new construction has been issued prior to the proposed amendments becoming effective, those structures will be considered existing per the flow chart, as long as the construction is following the approved development/building plans without changes. Public Comment Dick Spielman/town resident asked for clarification between a vacation home and a small hotel. John Phipps/town resident asked about whether there was a definition in the IRC for “single-family dwelling.” CBO Birchfield explained the difference, and Director Hunt stated there may be a small alignment issue between the EVDC and the IRC. Mr. Phipps was concerned about a duplex having a definition as a single-family dwelling. Chair Darling stated the Board of Appeals is not a decision- making body, but rather reviews and makes recommendations to the elected officials. Public comment closed. REVIEW OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION CBO Birchfield explained the proposed amendments for new construction would apply for new permits properly applied for, meaning the submittals have to be submitted properly within the timeline required. Last minute, incomplete submittals will not be accepted. It excludes development plans/building permits that were approved prior to the effective date of the proposed provisions, if approved and adopted. If there are more than two units in the building, it will have to be sprinkled and will also have to address handicap accessibility, which is not a change for current requirements. There are no changes for Dwellings. Vacation Homes and will not be required to sprinkle or provide accessibility, but will be required to have the life safety survey. The only change with the proposed amendment is the life safety survey. If a Vacation Home is designed under the IBC, it would be required to have sprinklers, accessibility compliance, and the life safety survey. This is a change from the current requirements. CBO Birchfield stated the codes are used to try to find ways to help property owners do what they want to do, exhausting all options. If you can interpret the code with more flexibility, that is preferred. The code states the occupant load in the IBC is 200 square feet per person. For Large Vacation Homes with nine or more occupants, 1800 square feet is the number determined to be classified as a Large Vacation Home and still stay within the code requirements. CBO Birchfield presented the proposed amendments regarding new construction of Large Vacation Homes (less than 30 days, nine or more occupants, groups only), to be regulated by the International Building Code (IBC). Sprinklers and the life safety survey will be required, and handicap accessibility will need to be addressed. Small hotels, where individuals may rent separate rooms, will be regulated by the IBC. In some cases, small hotels may not have to be sprinkled, but would still need to be compliant with handicap accessibility requirements. CBO Birchfield stated some vacation homes and some small hotels will have the same requirements, depending on the design. Hotels with more than eight occupants will be regulated by the IBC, as is the current practice. CBO Birchfield clarified the life safety surveys will occur following the required building inspections that take place during routine construction. He also clarified Note 4 on the flow chart, stating vacation homes in residential zone districts, with occupant loads of greater than eight, had to be registered for eight and under as of December 16, 2016 (per Town Board and County Commission decision). New construction of large vacation homes with occupancies of greater than eight will not be allowed in residential zone districts. CBO Birchfield explained the details of proposed life safety survey. This is not a comprehensive inspection. The Chief Building Official does not currently have the authority to request a vacation home inspection. If the Town Board decides to require life safety surveys, a provision has to be added to the code to give the authority, state what will be inspected, and the standards required for the inspections. Life safety inspections will be required with each new license or transfer of license. Director Hunt would hope a cooperative type of inspection could occur between the property owner, the Division of Building Safety, and the Code Compliance Department. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals3 March 2, 2017 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall CBO Birchfield stated a new section (R3.27) would be added to the IRC for the life safety surveys. The effective date will be January 1, 2019, so if the amendment is approved, property owners would have about two years to come into compliance with the requirements of the life safety survey. It will take time for some property owners to come into compliance to be allowed to use their home as a vacation home. The property owner will have to have their Certificate of Occupancy by January 1, 2019 to be a legal vacation home. In summary, there are proposed amendments for the following: Definitions Exceptions in the scoping provisions in the IRC Excluding sprinkler requirements from all one- and two-family dwellings Life safety surveys CBO Birchfield reviewed the draft version of the form being created for the survey. There was an extended discussion regarding emergency escape and rescue openings in all spaces used for sleeping purposes. There was extended discussion regarding gas-fired appliances and whether or not to require old ones to be brought up to current code requirements. Exterior fire pits were added to the list at the request of the Fire District, as they have concerns with some of them being too close to structures. CBO Birchfield reiterated the proposed life safety surveys are specific to vacation homes. Director Hunt stated the mapped Wildfire Hazard Maps are being updated and new information will be coming as soon as possible. Exit signs and lighting on exterior stairs are also being considered for the survey. CBO Birchfield stated the items on the life safety survey were staff recommendations, and he would th be presenting the information at the Town Board Study Session on March 14 to get final direction from the Trustees. Unless the building officials receive otherwise, the “plus 2” sleeping areas will need to be in areas approved for sleeping. Director Hunt stated there may be some instances where more than two people need to sleep in one bedroom. The “plus 2” is optional by homeowners, not required. It was moved and seconded (Spooner/Calvin) to recommend approval of the proposed amendments to the Estes Park Town Board and the motion passed 3-0 with two absent. CBO Birchfield stated that after he receives final direction, if any, from the elected officials, he will bring the final draft back to the Board of Appeals for the final update. nd The April Board of Appeals meeting will be held the 2 Thursday, April 13, 2017 from 4-6 p.m. There being no additional business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:03 p.m. ___________________________________ Don Darling, Chair ___________________________________ Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary 1000 Bishops Gate Blvd.,Suite 300 Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 tel. 1 800 444-4554 November 8, 2016 Mr.WillBirchfield,Building Official Estes Park 170 MacGregor Ave.,PO Box 1200 Estes Park,CO80517 RE: Building Code Effectiveness Grading ScheduleResults Estes Park,LarimerCounty,CO DearMr.Birchfield: We wish to thank you for the cooperation given to our representative, Ivone Cruz, during ourrecent survey. We have completed ouranalysis of the building codes adopted by your community and the efforts put forth to properly enforce those codes. The resulting Building Code Effectiveness Grading Classification is 3for 1 and 2 family residential property and 2for commercial and industrial property. The Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO) is an insurer-supported organization with the primary mission of providing advisory insurance underwriting and rating information to insurers. Thereis no requirement that insurers use our advisory material. Insurers may have adopted, or may be in the process of adopting, an ISO insurance rating program that will provide rating credits to individual property insurance policies in recognition of community efforts to mitigate property damage due to natural disasters. These insurers may use the Building Code Effectiveness Grading Classification we have recently developed for your community as a basis for the credits used. While individual insurers may usedifferent credits or different effective dates, the ISO program will apply credits to new construction within Estes Parkthat has been issued a Certificate of Occupancy in the year 2016 and forward. We will emailour report which provides additional information about our classification process and how we have graded various aspects of your community’s building codes and their enforcement. We want to highlight the fact that the Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule is an insurance underwriting and information tool; it is not intended to analyze all aspects of a comprehensive building code enforcement program nor is it for purposes of determining compliance with any state or local law or for making property/casualty loss prevention and life safety recommendations. If you have any questions about the Classification that was developed, please let us know. Additionally, if you are planning on any future changes in your building codes or their enforcement, please advise us as these changes may affect our analysis and your community’s grading classification. Sincerely, MaryLucidi Building Code Technical Analyst Enclosure cc: Mr.FrankLancaster,Town Administrator Estes Park 170 MacGregor Ave.,PO Box 1200 Estes Park,CO80517 CATStation Single Location Hazard Profile OfxBeesftt New Address Location Name: Entered Address:107 MacGregor Avenue,Estes Park,CO80517 Latitude:40.376853° North Longitude:-105.520652° East Catastrophe Hazard Information Matched Address:107 MACGREGOR AVE, ESTES PARK, LARIMER County, CO80517 Geocode Match:Exact Address Latitude:40.376853° North Longitude:-105.520652° East -- select a map -- MoreMaps:-- select a map --TM DisclaimerGoogle Earth Hurricane Profile A Hurricane Profile is not available. Severe Thunderstorm Profile Risk (Percentage Loss) 100-year loss level: 250-year loss level: Average Annual Loss:0.1% http://catstation.air-worldwide.com/CATStation/members/defaultPopUp.aspx?cls=cHazardAnalysis&meth=GetProfilerInput_Submit()\[11/8/2016 2:14:22 PM\] CATStation Relative Risk (Percentile) within county: within state: Hazard Information Tornado:Very High/High /Moderate /Low /Very Low Hail Storm:Very High/High /Moderate /Low /Very Low Straight-line Wind:Very High/High /Moderate /Low /Very Low Nearest Historical Tornadoes DateDistanceIntensity (mi)(Enhanced Fujita Scale) May 22, 200830.403 April 23, 196047.793 May 30, 195732.202 July 10, 195543.852 June 8, 195848.202 Nearest Historical Hail Storms DateDistanceIntensity by (mi)Average Hail Size (in) July 30, 197927.08>=4.0 June 4, 198344.33>=4.0 May 18, 195843.19>=4.0 June 13, 198446.163.0-4.0 June 10, 196928.522.0-3.0 Nearest Historical Straight-Line Wind Storms DateDistanceIntensity by (mi)Average Wind Speed (mph) September 19, 198126.3880-90 August 13, 198339.2180-90 May 28, 198934.8670-80 May 22, 200835.2970-80 June 4, 197843.9170-80 Winter Storm Profile Risk (Percentage Loss) 100-year loss level: 250-year loss level: Average Annual Loss:<0.1% http://catstation.air-worldwide.com/CATStation/members/defaultPopUp.aspx?cls=cHazardAnalysis&meth=GetProfilerInput_Submit()\[11/8/2016 2:14:22 PM\] CATStation Relative Risk (Percentile) within county: within state: Hazard Information Wind Frequency:Very High / High / Moderate / Low / Very Low Snow Frequency:Very High / High / Moderate / Low / Very Low Earthquake Profile Risk (Percentage Loss) 100-year loss level: 250-year loss level: Average Annual Loss:<0.1% Relative Risk (Percentile) within county: within state: Earthquake Information CA DOI Zone:Not Applicable Liquefaction Potential:Data Not Available Landslide Zone: Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone:Not Applicable Soil Type:Hard Rock Intensity by Probability of Exceedance (PE): Modified Mercalli IntensityVIVIIVIIIIXXXIXII 30 Year PE3.98%2.83%1.57%0.64%0.16%0.02%0% Intensity by Return Period: Return Period100 Year200 Year250 Year475 Year Modified Mercalli Intensity3.03.03.03.5 Fault Information NameDistance To Fault Fault Length Characteristic Event Return Period (mi)(mi)(magnitude)(years) Northern Sangre de Cristo fault139.53113.717.402793 Cheraw182.1127.347.0016722 Southern Sawatch fault106.4627.967.009689 Cheraw182.1127.346.886954 Historical Earthquakes NameDateMagnitudeEpicentral Distance Epicentral Depth (mi)(mi) UnnamedNovember 8, 18826.308.58N/A Flood Profile Flood Information Source:DFIRM http://catstation.air-worldwide.com/CATStation/members/defaultPopUp.aspx?cls=cHazardAnalysis&meth=GetProfilerInput_Submit()\[11/8/2016 2:14:22 PM\] CATStation Flood Zone:500-YearFlood Zone FEMA Flood Zone:X500Flood Zone Elevation:Greater than 1000 feet above mean sea level Shortest Distance to: Water Body:More than 5miles 100 Year Flood Plain:0.02miles 500 Year Flood Plain:0.03miles QsjouDmptfOfxBeesftt PrintCloseNew Address http://catstation.air-worldwide.com/CATStation/members/defaultPopUp.aspx?cls=cHazardAnalysis&meth=GetProfilerInput_Submit()\[11/8/2016 2:14:22 PM\]